What's the point with that quite lackluster story in Endwalker?

[Turtledeluxe]

Quick question Turtle. Is the reason you refuse to see it as a true loop because it removes the genesis of the knowledge? You mentioned you prefer the idea that a Venat exists without the future hints. Does that mean you reject the idea that the game you played through could have contained future hints for Venat explicitly because you just think she didn't?

It isn't really a refusal. It's how I interpreted the scene. To expound, everyone here is saying Venat didn't warn anyone and didn't do anything. Since there is no direct evidence of that (maybe she did and they still failed) I'm assuning this idea is based on the fact that immediately after we leave Elpis, the walk scene happens? It feels far too jarring imo for the writers to seriously be implying Venat knowingly repeated the exact same behavior after WoL leaves. To me it just felt like fanservice. It was just an abstraction bc fans always have always wanted a visual depiction of the sundering.

As far as Venat existing without the future hints, it's hard to explain. My thinking on this is:

- We are in the original timeline (MSQ)
- We time travel in this timeline to the past
- This creates an alternate timeline /deviation because, as I have mentioned, we already existed in Elpis as Azem although we are not shown in the Elpis trip (for this reason)
- Once we return to our timeline, because of a plot Mcguffin, this deviated timeline conjoins to MSQ original timeline

So the past of the MsQ plot is the original past (us as Azem, no future visit) , the present is a conjoined present (hence why we can visit Elpis and have the raids etc). I think this for several reasons

-- Venat in the present MSQ calls out a conjunction twice if I am not mistaken
-- the writers needed a way to have you directly play the cause of the Final Days bc there is NO way to just have it told to you
-- involving you as your own player character causes continuity issues with SHB so they had to wipe Emet and Hythlodeus's memories specifically
-- Venat's memory being kept in tact is needlessly problematic, to everyone's point, and again seemed like fanservice to enhance the emotional impact of the trial
-- As I've mentioned we were Azem...along with Ardbert and Golbez, and whoever is on the remaining reflections
- The writers themselves won't admit it because it's a cluster fuck that barely makes sense, not to withhold mystery

I can go on. There's lots of reasons I have this complicated view that basically boil down to fanservice, gameplay convenience, continuity issues, etc. It doesn't really have to do with saving Venat's character or the genesis of the knowledge.

I genuinely don't think Venat is meant to be saved. I don't even think of her as a protagonist. She's a misguided antagonist, like many of the Ancients. I think she had this idea based on her traveling that she couldn't leave the star because of a romantic idea that her passion for living, endless optimism etc were somehow essential to culture at large. And that ambition/self involvement exploded when she became Hydaelyn. I think given that its a 10 year old game there are lots of quotes you can likely pull that paint her this way or that-- but for EW I feel like they were trying to make her overall motivations/reactions what you see in the sundering sequence (and afterward) and in the trial. Someone who is sort of resigned, did their best to fend off the rejoining, knows they fucked up, and finally accepts that humanity doesn't need her. I don't think she's only crying because it's goodbye, but also because it's the end of her narcissism. It's like someone crying not for the victims but because they got caught in a way. But I also think that's why she's an amazing character, because the road to hell is paved with good intentions.